[PilatusTurbo]

Well yeah but he could have just made a straight up copy of the SAA...there were and still are companies that do that.

My point is he took the time and effort to design a whole new pistol action that wasn't a direct copy of the SAA....but yeah he made it "look" like a SAA cuz that was what was the popular fad at the time.

Nobody else was "updating" their SAA copies, but Ruger did and in the process made a better, safer gun.

It's not like the LCP which is a straight-up 100% copy of the Kel-Tec P3AT or the SR-series and now RXM which are obvious Glock clones. When Bill was still in charge his guns might look like something else but the guts were his own design. Even the original Mark pistol took it's styling cues from the Luger and Nambu pistols but the internals were all Bill Ruger.

This is what I was saying. Perfectly put. At the time of the modernized SAA clones, the OG Mark I 22, etc, no one was really doing unique but modernized (for their era) designs. I'm sure there were, actually, but none of them saw the same level of commercial success.

Like I mentioned, I did not know the P89 was widely considered a success. I figured it was akin to a failed Gov contest contract gun and went belly up like the RAP.

Furthermore, although everyone was doing DASA hammer guns, the P85 and P89 were ahead of their times with some truly innovative stuff that virtually no one else was doing. Cheap but solid production, ambi mag release, ambi safety decocker, etc. I can't think of a gun from that era, that had modern day ambi controls. I'm sure there were a few, but a solid, reliable, affordable American made gun offered those things to the working and wealthy class. The Ruger P89.

 

[Ebb27]

This is what I was saying. Perfectly put. At the time of the modernized SAA clones, the OG Mark I 22, etc, no one was really doing unique but modernized (for their era) designs. I'm sure there were, actually, but none of them saw the same level of commercial success.

Like I mentioned, I did not know the P89 was widely considered a success. I figured it was akin to a failed Gov contest contract gun and went belly up like the RAP.

Furthermore, although everyone was doing DASA hammer guns, the P85 and P89 were ahead of their times with some truly innovative stuff that virtually no one else was doing. Cheap but solid production, ambi mag release, ambi safety decocker, etc. I can't think of a gun from that era, that had modern day ambi controls. I'm sure there were a few, but a solid, reliable, affordable American made gun offered those things to the working and wealthy class. The Ruger P89.

The P85 was actually the gun developed for the military trials and it was basically a failure. There was an issue with firing pins breaking and when the safety was applied the gun could go off. It was recalled and corrected and the new pistols with the update were the P85 MKII, but the damage was done. And the P85s were replaced by the P89.

The P89 was for the most part just the P85 MKII re-badged as the P89...and the P89 was indeed one of Ruger's more successful pistols.

I was more of a P90 fan myself...had two a standard and a de-cocker model, had a P345 too. The only one I really miss is that decocker....wish I had kept that one.

 

[Jarhead Al]

Did anyone shoot or fondle their new RXM today? If so, tells us about it.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Did anyone shoot or fondle their new RXM today? If so, tells us about it.

Planning to go again, tomorrow. I'm on the fence about buying a membership to Shooter's World. On one hand it's close and convenient, I could go shoot virtually anytime I want. On the other, it's an indoor local range, it seems you just get a lot more dumberer people at these. I much prefer Ben Avery. Ben Avery is also a 90 minute round trip drive for me. 👀

If my optic doesn't arrive today, I'm still gonna test the TLR-7A on it, and perhaps the TLR-1HL. Though, even with the correct key, the TLR-1HL sits a little oddly on it. It would still work, but I think it's definitely a TLR-7A gun. I'll probably load a couple JHP rounds into the PMAGs and then load ball ammo on top, see if it nosedives the last round or two, but we'll see if I'm able to go.

 

[RUT]

>Did anyone shoot or fondle their new RXM today?<<

I'm fondling mine (RXM that is), but since it's a mere 3 deg. outside I won't be shooting it!

 

[Schrag4]

I hope these guns turn out to be solid, because I want one eventually. I’m also a Ruger fan, almost half my guns are Rugers.

I have a couple guns that take Glock 9mm double stack mags but neither of them are Glocks. I wouldn’t mind adding another

(my only Glock is in .40)

 

[Ebb27]

I'm fondling mine (RXM that is), but since it's a mere 3 deg. outside I won't be shooting it!

Oh come on bud...that's rookie talk!

It's a new gun and you're whining about the weather?

What a golden opportunity to test that pistol in extreme cold conditions and you're gonna let it slip through your fingers!

You're not always gonna just need a gun to work on bright sunshiny days when it's warm and cozy outside.

 

[Scrappy]

WOW, After 40 years another Glock clone. No thanks

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Not for everybody for sure.

My optic arrived for it. Gonna do optic and WML tests tomorrow. 😁

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Well, here it is, complete. Ready for more testing and fun tomorrow. Holosun 507C Opmod Grey, thanks to @FrankenGunBuilder for finding that deal for me! Messing around with the optic, and boresighting it, it really is a lot nicer than a K model. Bigger window, nicer optic. I haven't messed with a C model in a couple of years, so I can see this lasting.

You can see just the tops of the front and rear sight at the bottom of the window, so back up iron sights are perfectly available, but not taking up the bottom third of the window, either. Very nice setup. Below is the optics cut, and I'd placed the two little posts at the front, as you can see. Those lined up perfectly with the 507C, and it's a snug fit. I did ensure that the longer screws were good, and didn't protrude down into the extractor plunger channel, and everything was still freely moving. Fed snap caps right up the ramp with no binding. Good to go.

Another range rep with TLR-7A and probably TLR-1HL WML tests, coming soon.

 

[FrankenGunBuilder]

Well, here it is, complete. Ready for more testing and fun tomorrow. Holosun 507C Opmod Grey, thanks to @FrankenGunBuilder for finding that deal for me! Messing around with the optic, and boresighting it, it really is a lot nicer than a K model. Bigger window, nicer optic. I haven't messed with a C model in a couple of years, so I can see this lasting.

You can see just the tops of the front and rear sight at the bottom of the window, so back up iron sights are perfectly available, but not taking up the bottom third of the window, either. Very nice setup. Below is the optics cut, and I'd placed the two little posts at the front, as you can see. Those lined up perfectly with the 507C, and it's a snug fit. I did ensure that the longer screws were good, and didn't protrude down into the extractor plunger channel, and everything was still freely moving. Fed snap caps right up the ramp with no binding. Good to go.

Another range rep with TLR-7A and probably TLR-1HL WML tests, coming soon.

Can't believe how good that looks. Like it was meant to be!

 

[PilatusTurbo]

Can't believe how good that looks. Like it was meant to be!

For sure man, It's quite the little setup. Thank you for being involved and really helping me get it there, despite the fact that you're not too into what it is. This is what this community is about and its peak, when we collaborate, communicate, and have fun in our shared hobby and right.

This whole setup didn't cost an arm and a leg, either. If it does well with WML and Optics, I can't see why this won't be a solid firearm. It's only going to improve with feedback, and additional options will be offered by Ruger and Magpul, I'm almost certain of it.

Many naysayers are claiming it's just another Glock-alike or Glock clone. The Gen 3 Glock has become the AR-15 of the pistol world, and there are innumerable copies of the 1911 and 2011, various shotguns, etc and they don't seem to realize that's the same type of thing. Some of them do, and are just bored with Ruger doing this, instead of something really new; There are those who will dislike it, and that's ok.

It's pretty hard to come up with something new in this incredibly saturated market. What they may not realize, is this hasn't really been done before. Yeah, the Zev or whatever it was, and it was ridiculously expensive for what it was, and no one would buy it. This is a modular FCU Glock clone that people will actually buy because they can. If this thing really reaches $349 street price, dang, I'll be utterly impressed. Even if you have an issue with one, It's Ruger, you're good.

Again, this is Ruger's bread and butter. Decent firearm for a decent price, that the working man can afford. That kind of is their heritage, to be honest. I'm on board with it. It's twice the gun the Security 9 series is for only $50-100 more.

 

[marsbase]

The Gen 3 Glock has become the AR-15 of the pistol world, and there are innumerable copies of the 1911 and 2011, various shotguns, etc and they don't seem to realize that's the same type of thing. ....

If this thing really reaches $349 street price, dang, I'll be utterly impressed.

I agree that you have a VERY nice looking pistol. Wow. Yes, the Gen 3 Glock is like the AR15 or 1911 because they are all patent free and that encourages lots of competition, which improves quality and reduces price. But the RXM re-introduces patents in a way that may block competition.... unless they open up the FCU to 3rd party players. Can anyone who wants to make frames, locking blocks, and trigger housings for that FCU without paying a "tax" to Ruger? If so, I'm all for it. And I also agree that if they can make a profit at a $349 street price, that itself will be competition for Glock. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[PilatusTurbo]

I agree that you have a VERY nice looking pistol. Wow. Yes, the Gen 3 Glock is like the AR15 or 1911 because they are all patent free and that encourages lots of competition, which improves quality and reduces price. But the RXM re-introduces patents in a way that may block competition.... unless they open up the FCU to 3rd party players. Can anyone who wants to make frames, locking blocks, and trigger housings for that FCU without paying a "tax" to Ruger? If so, I'm all for it. And I also agree that if they can make a profit at a $349 street price, that itself will be competition for Glock. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Agreed on the blocked competition part. I wonder if they will open source it; it would be very wise, as you said, but it's also rough because everyone and their mother will directly copy it and try to make their quick buck off Ruger's designs. Double edged sword.

I'm trying to get to the range, but time will tell today. I wanna go, trust me I also have another Ruger, finally finished and I'm gonna throw a post up on that today, too.

 

[Ebb27]

Other than the actual FCU and it's components I'm not seeing much else they could patent.

The grip frame is just so wide open to variations that I don't see how they could patent it. Just a minor change here or there could get around any patent.

From what I gather the slide is pure Glock...although they might be able to patent the optic mount system, but even then that would be iffy.

Of course the big factor will be if they take-off. If it's a hit expect aftermarket support...if not maybe a few components from Ruger....or not.

 

[The_Real_Maxmanta]

At a third of the price, maybe even a quarter of the price

Regardless, my point stands.

 

[thombri7]

Well, I fell for it, or the marketing, or the "gotta have it" or whatever, and I'm gonna guinea pig it for GT. I went and had a look at it, and I will say, I'm impressed. Walked out having purchased it for $395.99. Please enjoy the thread, all commentary positive, neutral, and negative welcome. I don't care if you like or dislike the new RXM, I'd still like to hear. I hope this will become the new thread for this thing moving forward, here on GT.

I got a host of pics here for you guys, and please request any additional pics. I wanted to really see the FCU, and all that.

INITIAL IMPRESSIONS: Grip feels better than a Gen 3 19, but still large, but feels good. Fit and finish, especially machining of the slide is immaculate, and very consistent. Smooth nitride finish, similar to my favorite S&W Armornite or whatever the hell they call it.
GRIP: Grip texture is perfect. I mean that, Magpul nailed it. Undercut is minimal, but feels great. Backstrap is consistent radius, and minimal beavertail. Trigger guard is rounded, no texture on front of it, doesn't matter to me. ETA: Forgot to add, nicely molded in integrated flared magwell. Visually unobtrusive, but functionally there if you gotta have one. Nice to have.

CONTROLS: Are nice and extended just enough. Style language is a bit new to me, but I'm pretty happy with it.

TRIGGER: Like a Gen 3 Glock, but it's just a hair nicer. Reset is stronger, but a little longer, by sev than my G19.3. I wonder if it's a Ruger "minus" connector, but time will tell. Kinda flat faced, kinda not. I'm not confirmation biasing myself to death, but it's one of the nicest trigger shoes on a plastic gun yet, IMO.

SIGHTS: Blacked out serrated rear, and Tritium white outline front. Suppressor/optics height, but still fit the gun nicely even without an optic.
ETA: Tritium glow isn't bad, but could be brighter. I'm used to Truglos which are nearly bright enough to read by in a dark room.

OPTICS CUT: Haven't taken the plate off, no need yet, but it's designed to fit 3 different patterns: RMR, DPP, RMSc with no plates required. I'll get a pic soon and edit the thread, here.
FCU: Intriguing. I was very curious as to how they did this, and it's looking pretty cool.

I hope to actually get out and shoot it soon, perhaps tomorrow, if time permits. Regardless of how it performs, I decided to get on board early with this one. Even if it does have issues, which I hope Ruger realizes a solid launch is critical, I know Ruger will have our back and make it right whatever it takes. If it shoots anything like my Gen 3 Glock 19, but improved, I think it's gonna be winner.

Thanks for reading. Fire away with the comments!

I’m so looking forward to getting one! I have three Glocks and a CZ P10 C and i love them all! I so wish they did an all black one though, not a fan of the grey!

 

[GLOCK!]

I’m so looking forward to getting one! I have three Glocks and a CZ P10 C and i love them all! I so wish they did an all black one though, not a fan of the grey!

They’re selling black frames on the Ruger site for $39

 

[marsbase]

Other than the actual FCU and it's components I'm not seeing much else they could patent.

The grip frame is just so wide open to variations that I don't see how they could patent it. Just a minor change here or there could get around any patent.

From what I gather the slide is pure Glock...although they might be able to patent the optic mount system, but even then that would be iffy.

Of course the big factor will be if they take-off. If it's a hit expect aftermarket support...if not maybe a few components from Ruger....or not.

Apparently, the slide and barrel will not be encumbered by patents but only by trademarks related to the appearance of their RXM slide. The RXM is Glock Gen 3 compatible in that regard.

The frame is certainly patented because it has a specific configuration required to hold the FCU. The trigger housing and locking block have a specific configuration required to fit in the FCU. And of course the FCU itself is also patented.

The usual way to include third parties is to charge license fees under the patent to allow copies. That's what I meant by a "tax". But I think Ruger would be foolish to crush the aftermarket by charging those fees. It would be smarter to allow fee-free licenses for everything except the FCU itself. Then Ruger would be at the center of an FCU based ecosystem and they will have outflanked Glock by creating the first "Glockish" FCU. Then every RXM compatible pistol would have a Ruger FCU at its core. That would be cheap to manufacture and would be VERY profitable.

Actually, the biggest problem I can see with this scenario is that Magpul is going to vigorously enforce its frame patents because that's all they get out of this deal. Unless Ruger actually holds the patent on the part of the frame that connects to the FCU and have just licensed it to Magpul. In that case, Magpul is just getting a head start before other competitors enter the field.

 

[thombri7]

They’re selling black frames on the Ruger site for $39

Thanks so much! Bit beyond my experience level, but I’m sure i can find someone to help me